In 1942 the Beveridge Report, commissioned by the United Kingdom government, was published. It laid out in detail the social/class distinctions and distribution of wealth brought about by the social and economic conditions in the 1930s, exacerbated by the effects of the Second World War. It set out a vision for a post war UK that would at the very least mitigate the effect of the major causes of disadvantage.
Five 'giants' were identified in the Report:
Want: to be addressed through a comprehesive scheme of national insurance building on the National Insurance Act 1911, the brainchild of the then Chancellor of the Exchequer David Lloyd George.
Disease: To be addressed by the formation of a state-owned National Health Service, free at point of need.
Ignorance: Lack of education and educational opportunity. The Education Act 1945 introduced a new pattern of education provision.
Squalor: A post war house building boom, partly as a conseqence of rebuilding after bomb damage in the war, but also to tackle slum properties and issues surrounding the close juxtaposition of heavy industry and housing.
Idleness: Forced unemployment in the 1930s led the Report to argue that policies should seek to secure full employment.
The Education Act preceded the Labour government under Clement Attlee elected after the end of the war. The new government set about implementing the provisions of the Beveridge Report along with legislation to nationalise heavy industries and utilities.
The relative success or failure of successive governments to achieve the vision set out in the Beveridge Report is illustrated starkly by the reports published in 1984 by the Church of England: Faith in the City and Faith in the Countryside. They painted a depressing picture.
Fast forward forty years and read reports by organisations such as the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and it becomes apparent quickly that whilst some of the issues identified by Beveridge have been addressed there is much still to do to tackle poverty and its causes, as well as issues of discrimination.
One of the problems is that there is little appetite by a majority of the electorate to demand change to eradicate disadvantage, a point well-made by JK Galbraith who argued (in a USA context) that there exist the economic means to effect change but self-interest means there is no will to do so.
The gap between government provision and individual need has been met in part by the work of numerous faith and secular organisations, both locally and nationally based. Some go beyond providing help and campaign for systemic change to achieve social justice. This non-statutory sector includes charities and community interest companies. Some charities are limited companies, other unincorporated associations. The sector is chaotic, there is overlapping, gaps in provision but one factor coming to dominate is financial fragility as funding from individual donors and companies, statutory bodies commissioning work and charitable trusts slows down or dries up. It makes longer-term planning impossible as organisations struggle to survive in a threatening economic climate and onerus regulatory control.
Religious bodies and other faith based organisations have a long history of participation in the charitable sector. They are not immune to the problems faced by secular organisations.
For my part I have been convicted of the ideas attributed to Jesus as set out in the synoptic gospels and in particular the Sermon on the Mount, the parables and the injunction to love your neighbour. The ideas of Liberation Theology and progressive theology have had a major impact on my attitudes, particularly the work of Gustavo Gutierrez, Jurgen Moltmann and Martin Luther King Jnr.
How to bring theory to bear on the ground, to drive action at local level, is the subject of my next post.
No comments:
Post a Comment